Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Why did we wait so long for the bicycle?

rootsofprogress.org

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

11–20 of 515 posts

Re: Why did we wait so long for the bicycle?

#11

Post by asark »

closeparen wrote: post #4

Why did we wait so long after the modern bicycle to see it as transportation rather than recreation? Awareness of climate change maybe? It seems that a) bicycles were not primary transportation even before cars, and b) the push to replace cars with bikes could have happened at any point, even before cars took off. So why now?

Bicycles seem really expensive to me, relative to cars, considering how much simpler they are and how much less total material's involved. Plus they're a whole lot easier to ship. Not TCO, sure, but sheer cost of the manufactured object at retail. And on the cheaper end they often barely work correctly at all anyway, and all of them seem to require a lot more maintenance than a car, per hour of use or (especially, by long shot) per KM travelled. I assume these are economy of scale issues that may be sorted out if bicycle use grows significantly—though I'm not sure about the reliability.

Re: Why did we wait so long for the bicycle?

#12

Post by mc32 »

otabdeveloper2 wrote: post #10

Bad quality article. There's a simple answer: ball bearings are relatively high tech that requires lots of innovation to come together at the same time.

True for a modern bike, but a brass (whatever metal) bushing would work for a more primitive bike.

Re: Why did we wait so long for the bicycle?

#13

Post by jaclaz »

closeparen wrote: post #4

Why did we wait so long after the modern bicycle to see it as transportation rather than recreation? Awareness of climate change maybe? It seems that a) bicycles were not primary transportation even before cars, and b) the push to replace cars with bikes could have happened at any point, even before cars took off. So why now?

Well, it depends on where, seemingly you forget Europe in the years around (before and after) WWII and of course whole China.

Re: Why did we wait so long for the bicycle?

#14

Post by [deleted] »

dboreham wrote: post #2

Same for steam engines: it turns out Watt spent most of his effort on getting components manufactured and having the associated manufacturing processes developed. The basic idea of the steam engine had been around for a long time prior. You can ask the same question of Romans and electricity. They had all the necessary tech: glass for insulators, acid for batteries, metallurgy for wire etc.

[deleted]

Re: Why did we wait so long for the bicycle?

#15

Post by otabdeveloper2 »

mc32 wrote: post #12
otabdeveloper2 wrote: post #10

Bad quality article. There's a simple answer: ball bearings are relatively high tech that requires lots of innovation to come together at the same time.

True for a modern bike, but a brass (whatever metal) bushing would work for a more primitive bike.

Such a primitive bike is only a novelty, not a mode of transportation. It would be less efficient and more expensive than just walking. (I.e., a toy.)

Re: Why did we wait so long for the bicycle?

#16

Post by giobox »

mc32 wrote: post #6

So it looks like there were attempts but they had fatal design flaws and technology (metallurgy) was immature. One question raised is why didn’t we see a trike come about before the bike? It’s more stable and propulsion via direct front pedal isn’t as awkward as the front pedal bike.

While it’s maybe surprising, have you ever tried riding something with a 1:1 drive ratio? There’s a reason even bikes with a fixed gear still have gears...

Pedals connected directly to the front wheel would be truly awful for virtually all adult bicycle use cases.

Re: Why did we wait so long for the bicycle?

#18

Post by robin_reala »

giobox wrote: post #16
mc32 wrote: post #6

So it looks like there were attempts but they had fatal design flaws and technology (metallurgy) was immature. One question raised is why didn’t we see a trike come about before the bike? It’s more stable and propulsion via direct front pedal isn’t as awkward as the front pedal bike.

While it’s maybe surprising, have you ever tried riding something with a 1:1 drive ratio? There’s a reason even bikes with a fixed gear still have gears... Pedals connected directly to the front wheel would be truly awful for virtually all adult bicycle use cases.

Well, the obvious contender for that is the penny farthing. It’s not dreadful (it was good enough to be commercialised with vague success at least), but it’s inconvenienced by the necessary size of the front wheel to make any progress, and the fact that you can’t have a front-wheel brake as you just rotate over the top of the bicycle when applied.

Re: Why did we wait so long for the bicycle?

#19

Post by SilasX »

otabdeveloper2 wrote: post #10

Bad quality article. There's a simple answer: ball bearings are relatively high tech that requires lots of innovation to come together at the same time.

Relatedly, my favorite example of "why didn't this get invented before" is wheeled luggage which (from what I've read) wasn't sold until 1989, even though the wheelbarrow (the same basic idea) has been around since prehistoric times.

IIRC, the reason it didn't appear sooner was a combination of a) getting reliable castors[1] for wheels that small is a non-trivial problem, and b) there wasn't much demand for it until the 80s.

[1] These things: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Caster

Re: Why did we wait so long for the bicycle?

#20

Post by [deleted] »

robin_reala wrote: post #18
giobox wrote: post #16

Earlier quoted context omitted.

While it’s maybe surprising, have you ever tried riding something with a 1:1 drive ratio? There’s a reason even bikes with a fixed gear still have gears... Pedals connected directly to the front wheel would be truly awful for virtually all adult bicycle use cases.

Well, the obvious contender for that is the penny farthing. It’s not dreadful (it was good enough to be commercialised with vague success at least), but it’s inconvenienced by the necessary size of the front wheel to make any progress, and the fact that you can’t have a front-wheel brake as you just rotate over the top of the bicycle when applied.

[deleted]
Post reply on HN